Trump was being interviewed by Chris Mathews of MSNBC. Matthew, like all of the good folks at MSNBC, is a committed worshiper of civil government. He also hates the moral law of the God of the Bible and takes any opportunity he can to mock it. He also hates Christians. And he thinks murdering an unborn baby is just dandy. He set Trump up by positing a world in which abortion has been outlawed, like it was in the good old days of back-alley abortions prior to 1973. He then asked Trump what should happen if a woman sought out an abortion. According to this quote from the New York Times, Trump declared, "You go back to a position like they had where they would perhaps go to illegal places. But you have to ban it. There has to be some form of punishment.” Matthews, who had been doing a sophisticated song and dance of his own when Trump asked him if he, as a Catholic, agreed with the Pope's position on abortion, asked Trump if the punishment would apply to the women seeking an abortion. Trump answered in the affirmative. That is when all irrational lunacy broke out.
Before discussing Trump's position as related to Matthews, let's consider Matthew's position on abortion for a moment. He said that he accepts the position of the Pope that abortion is immoral but denies that it necessarily follows that it should be illegal because, in his twisted mind, something can be immoral and legal at the same time. Clearly Chris did not want to get on the wrong side of the Catholic Church so he said what he had to in order to dodge the issue and his actual support for the practice of abortion. He then has the audacity to accuse Trump of double-speak when Trump's campaign advisers come out with a revised statement about his position on abortion after the interview went berserk. I call that hypocrisy.
Sadly, Trump's camp did change his official position from what he told Matthews to the more socially acceptable view that the pregnant woman who conspires with a government approved doctor to kill her baby is a victim of the act of abortion. I am more interested in his first answer, when he said what he really believes.
I did not know this fact but apparently both pro-abortion and anti-abortion camps are in agreement that the pregnant woman who solicits a doctor to kill her baby should be deemed to be a victim of the abortion process. That is an outlandish and contradictory position but I can see the utility of it. The number of women who get abortions is much greater than the number of doctors who perform them. It follows from that truth that there are many more potential votes to be solicited from women who have had abortions than the doctors who perform them. Since all the career politicians and businessmen who are seeking the office of King of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika desperately need the women's vote, even the Trump camp had to change his position to vainly avoid losing even more of the XX chromosome political support. Two terrible truths follow from what we have learned thus far.
First, women should never have been given the right to vote. This country started its inexorable march towards socialism the moment women were permitted to vote. As women vote primarily by following their emotions, while men vote primarily by following rational thought processes, it is a foregone conclusion that soft-headed and emotional women will want to expand the welfare state exponentially. And that, of course, is precisely what has happened since they began flocking to the voting booths to express their emotional opinions on things they would have been better off leaving alone.
Second, it is impossible to conceive of a more morally incorrect position than the one apparently adopted by Evangelicals in regards to abortion. In a similar fashion to politicians who need more voters, Evangelicals desperately need more church members as they seek to fund their mega-church mortgages and pay their pastors outlandish salaries. Alienating half of the population, by casting women as perpetrators of murder when they get abortions, is not going to cut it. On the contrary, casting women as victims, a class status everybody likes to be labeled with, makes them far more likely to have a favorable opinion of the evangelical Church when the practice of abortion is considered.
It is the woman who gets pregnant. It is the woman who decides to kill the baby that is growing within her. It is the woman who sets the appointment with the abortion doctor. It is the woman who drives to the abortion mill. It is the woman who gets up on to the operating table. It is the woman who says "thank you" to the government approved doctor after he kills her baby. And it is the taxpayers who pay for all of this. As you can see, the great majority of the blame for killing a baby via abortion is directly attributable to the woman.
Donald Trump was right. A woman who gets an abortion is guilty of murder. According to biblical law a murderer should be put to death by the civil government. That was the only thing Trump did not get right. Matthews suggested that maybe a woman should get 10 years in prison for getting an abortion and Donald said he would not commit to a punishment at that time. He should have followed through and alienated everyone but the theonomists. He should have declared that a woman who gets an abortion should be executed for her crime. Oh what fun we could be having today if only Trump had followed through on his opinion properly.